The 2nd one with the 50-50 split is my favourite so far. Retains a feature of the last badge whilst also updating it so that it resembles a Hornet. A Stupendous confectionary.
It's from a gay dating app so you may be correct! (It still came up in a 'hornet logo' search but maybe that was the 'horn' bit)
Looks quite similar to some of the very rough attempts I had a go at. Problem is, it doesn't look much like a hornet either (though maybe more lines/stripes on the tail would help).
The pronounciation is odd in its own right - Wotford, in effect - unless you pronounce it to rhyme with - vat.....
I'm wondering if it's possible to have a badge that is half Waford and half whichever team we are playing. Where something more permanent is required, our default could be half Watford and half Liverpool, Man Utd or Man City, just to show our humility at being in the same league as these giants of football.
Rather than change our badge to a hornet, wouldn't it be easier to change our nickname to 'The Mooses' would b great for expanding our Canadian fanbase.
Does anyone have a copy of the badge when we wore blue. Looking back (yes I'm THAT old) I can't even remember if there was a badge.
Here you go Ron.. A history of our kit and badges (at the bottom) http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Watford/Watford.htm I thik they may have made a mistake though as I have seen a photo of what appears to be a blue kit with the old "wfc" badge on. I will research a bit further.
Incidently - I'll just throw this Geordie post (my emphasis) into the mix (perhaps I should have put it in the Benitez thread): Is the reason for the 'change' not so much the moose but the fact that the Pozzos don't 'own' it?
WOW! What a brilliant point, I think you may have it! I have asked myself many times, why the club would really want to stir up and divide fans over a badge when let's face it the current one is not just fine but actually very good. Now, you have come up with a possible answer?
Gino own's the club though. I'd be fairly certain the crest/badge is property of the club. Because if the club don't own it, who else possibly could?
It's certainly the club who step in when people use the badge without permission. I imagine Ashley has just split the company's assets up so he can benefit. The traditional route was hiving off the stadium. Plenty of characters have done that. I suppose it was always natural intellectual property would be next in line. Just needs someone with the thick skin to pull it off.
Quite right. But that is because Arsenal continuously added bits to their old badge over the years and subsequently could not copyright it so changed to one they could. It may well be the case that Watford can't copyright their badge - but our badge is nowhere near as 'busy' or detailed as their old one and as far as I can see, the exact image of the hart on our badge isn't taken from another source (the old Arsenal badge had a coat of arms and a cannon directly lifted from other sources hence why they could not copyright it) - so I'd be surprised. Not at all saying your theory is wrong. I just think it's unlikely. I think the truth is that they probably just see the badge as dated. They've modernised the club from top to bottom with stadium, facilities, playing staff, kits etc etc. The badge was the next logical step for them but realised they would have to consult fans.
The more I think about it, the more iconic I think our badge really is. It really is an amazing badge. To be honest I think changing it is more to do with that new marketing muppet being given too much of a free rain. He has no interest in the real fans or the club. A new fan in Asia is worth 10 existing season ticket holders to this ****head. For him Watford FC is a career stepping stone and nothing more. If he was working at Leeds he'd already be needing police protection but us Watford fans are 'too nice'. U can develop a global fanbase without turning a football club into a souless gimmick. Did no-one else find the statement after the cup final about our new international followers a cause for concern?
I'm no legal expert but I wonder if there is also an issue of 'acquired rights' over the use of an old badge. If it's been out there for years without a copyright, perhaps parties other than the club cannot now be stopped from using it whereas if you produce a new one you can nail down the rights to it from the start.
ISTR that there was an old barrow boy outside Highbury whose family business (since the gooners moved there) was selling Arsenal badged gear/tat. I *think* the club went down the legal route (come the birth of 'proper' football in 'Year Zero*') to stop him but were told pretty much what @WillisWasTheWorst said - hence the badge re-brand. *1992 or 0 AS**. ** After Sky.
Arsenal (eventually) won their case against the guy selling the tat, it’s an important case in UK trademark law. Club logos will have copyright as soon as they are created. You don’t need to register anything for copyright in the UK, it is automatic. As long as a badge isn’t a total copy, there will be copyright associated with it. Copyright runs out eventually though, so the best way of protecting your badge is a trade mark which can last forever. The good thing about a new badge in the club’s mind is likely that they can register a TM before it is launched, so they have no awkward arguments about people having used the badge previously in their own trade. This is how Man City did it when they redesigned. Registered the TM before launching the new badge, although they hit the timing wrong and their TM application published before they launched the new brand. Whoops. F1 also did this with their new logo but timed it right.
Just out of interest, has anyone actually seen a new badge better than what we already have? Every new badge I’ve seen so far is rubbish.
